Contents

Through the early 1880s, some 15,000 labourers were brought from China to do construction work on the Canadian Pacific Railway, though they were only paid a third or a half less than their coworkers.[2] This immigration into British Columbia (BC) was large enough— some 3,000 Chinese, when the 1871 census counted only 33,586 in the province— to arouse concern. The provincial legislature passed a strict law to virtually prevent Chinese immigration in 1878. However, this was immediately struck down by the courts as ultra vires [beyond the powers of] the provincial legislative assembly, as it impinged upon federal jurisdiction over immigration into Canada.[3]

Responding to anti-immigration sentiment in British Columbia, the federal parliament passed in 1885 the Chinese Immigration Act,[4] which stipulated that all Chinese entering Canada must first pay a $50 fee,[5][6] later referred to as a head tax. This was amended in 1887,[7] 1892,[8] and 1900,[9] with the fee increasing to its maximum of $500 in 1903.[6] Not all Chinese arrivals had to pay the head tax, however; some were presumed to return to China after "sojourning" to Canada because of their transitory occupation or background (students, teachers, missionaries, merchants, members of the diplomatic corps) and were therefore exempt from paying this fee.[4][10]

Canadian missionary George Leslie Mackay spoke out against the tax in 1894 and motivated the Presbyterian Church in Canada to adopt a resolution opposing the tax.[11]

Not only did the Crown in Right of Canada collect about $23 million ($308 million in 2015 dollars[12]) in face value from about 81,000 head tax payers,[2] but the tax system also had the effect of constraining Chinese immigration; it discouraged Chinese women and children from joining their men, so the Chinese community in Canada became a "bachelor society".[2] This, though, still did not meet the goal, articulated by contemporary politicians and labour leaders, of exclusion of Chinese immigration altogether.[10] That was achieved through the same law that ended the head tax: the Chinese Immigration Act of 1923, which stopped Chinese immigration entirely, albeit with certain exemptions for business owners and others.[1] It is sometimes referred to by opponents as the Chinese Exclusion Act, a term also used for its American counterpart.[13]

After the Chinese Immigration Act was repealed in 1948, a number of activists including Wong Foon Sien began campaigning the federal government to seek redress for the head tax.

The modern era redress movement may be traced back to 1984, when Vancouver Member of Parliament (MP) Margaret Mitchell raised in the Canadian House of Commons the issue of repaying the Chinese Head Tax for two of her constituents.[14] Over 4,000 other head tax payers and their family members then approached the Chinese Canadian National Council (CCNC) and its member organizations across Canada to register their Head Tax certificates and ask CCNC to represent them to lobby the government for redress.[15][16] The redress campaign included holding community meetings, gathering support from other groups and prominent people, increasing the media profile, conducting research and published materials, making presentations at schools, etc.

In 1993, then prime minister Brian Mulroney made an offer of individual medallions, a museum wing, and other collective measures involving several other redress-seeking communities. These were rejected outright by the Chinese Canadian national groups. After Jean Chrétien, in the same year, replaced Mulroney as prime minister, the Cabinet openly refused to provide an apology or redress.[15] Still, the CCNC and its supporters continued to raise the issue whenever they could, including a submission to the United Nations Human Rights Commission and eventually undertaking court action against the Crown-in-Council, arguing that the federal Crown should not be profiting from racism and that it had a responsibility under both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and international human rights law. In addition, the 1988 apology and compensation for the internment of Japanese Canadians during the Second World War was regarded as a precedent for redressing other racially motivated policies. The Ontario court declared in 2001 that the government of Canada had no obligation to redress the head tax levied on Chinese immigrants because the Charter had no retroactive application and the case of internment of Japanese Canadians was not a legal precedent. Two appeals in 2002 and 2003 were unsuccessful.[17]

When Paul Martin was elected prime minister in 2003, there was a sense of urgency as it became clear that there were perhaps only a few dozen surviving Chinese Head Tax payers left and maybe a few hundred spouses or widows. Several regional and national events had been organised to revitalize the redress campaign:[18][19] In 2004, Doudou Diène, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, concluded that Canada should redress the head tax to Chinese Canadians in response to a submission by May Chiu, legal counsel to the Chinese Canadian Redress Alliance, [20] and, in 2005, Gim Wong, an 82-year-old son of two head tax payers and a World War II veteran, conducted a cross-country Ride for Redress on his Harley Davidson motorcycle.[21][22]

On November 17, 2005, a group calling itself the National Congress of Chinese Canadians announced that an agreement had been reached between 11 Chinese-Canadian groups and the federal Cabinet, wherein the Queen-in-Council would pay $12.5 million for the creation of a new non-profit foundation to educate Canadians about anti-Chinese discrimination, with a specific pre-condition that no apology would be expected from any government figure. This upset the CCNC and its affiliates, as this purported deal had been reached without their input, leading to the Department of Canadian Heritage's announcement on November 24, 2005, that the agreed upon funding would be reduced to $2.5 million. It was later revealed that Raymond Chan, the government official claiming to have negotiated the deal, had purposely misled both the ministers of the Crown and the public and some of the groups named as being party to the agreement stated publicly that their names had been used without permission; several other groups listed did not even exist. Regardless, bill C-333, a private member's bill, was tabled in the federal parliament in order to implement the deal in November, 2004, but this bill died when parliament was dissolved on November 28, 2005.

The 2006 federal election was won by the Conservative Party, though it was a minority government that was formed. Three days after the ballots had been counted on January 23, but before he had been appointed prime minister, Harper reiterated his position on the head tax issue in a news conference: "Chinese Canadians are making an extraordinary impact on the building of our country. They've also made a significant historical contribution despite many obstacles. That's why, as I said during the election campaign, the Chinese Canadian community deserves an apology for the head tax and appropriate acknowledgement and redress."[24]

Formal discussions on the form of apology and redress began on March 24, 2006, with a preliminary meeting between Chinese Canadians representing various groups (including some head tax payers), heritage ministerBev Oda, and Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister Jason Kenney resulting in the "distinct possibility" of an apology being issued before July 1, 2006, to commemorate the anniversary of the enacting of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1923.[25] The meeting was followed by the government's acknowledgement, in the Speech from the Throne delivered by Governor GeneralMichaëlle Jean on April 4, 2006, that an apology would be given along with proper redress.[26]

From April 21 to April 30, 2006, the Crown-in-Council hosted public consultations across Canada, in cities most actively involved in the campaign: Halifax, Vancouver, Toronto, Edmonton, Montreal, and Winnipeg.[27] They included the personal testimony of elders and representatives from a number of groups, among them the Halifax Redress Committee; the British Columbia Coalition of Head Tax Payers, Spouses and Descendants; ACCESS; the Ontario Coalition of Head Tax Payers and Families; the CCNC; and, the Edmonton Redress Committee of the Chinese Canadian Historical Association of Alberta and Chinese Canadian Redress Alliance.

Some considered that the major issues revolve around the content of any settlement, with the leading groups demanding meaningful redress, not only for the handful of surviving "head tax" payers and widows/spouses, but first-generation sons/daughters who were direct victims, as told in the documentary Lost Years: A People's Struggle for Justice.

Some have proposed that the redress be based on the number of "Head Tax" Certificates (or estates) brought forward by surviving sons and daughters who are still able to register their claims, with proposals for individual redress, ranging from $10,000 to $30,000 for an estimated 4,000 registrants.[28][29][30]

On June 22, 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper offered an apology and compensation only for the head tax once paid by Chinese immigrants.[31] Survivors or their spouses were paid approximately CAD$20,000 ($22.5 thousand in 2015 dollars[12]) in compensation.[32] There were only an estimated 20 Chinese Canadians who paid the tax still alive in 2006.[33]

As no mention of redress for the children was made, the Chinese Canadian community continues to fight for a redress from the Canadian government. A national day of protest was held to coincide with Canada Day 2006 in major cities across Canada, and several hundred Chinese Canadians joined in local marches.